Skip to Content

Another example of how proprietary software can be bad for your health

BooDy's picture

No Fix for 'Critical' Hole in Windows 98, ME

The way I see it there are 3 possible reasons why Microsoft won't create a fix for these versions of Windows

1- They can't really fix it like they're saying. Now if you are a normal computer user this is something you can actually believe. But from a software developer's point of view this means only two things. Either Microsoft has a bunch of incompetent developers who can't find a way around this problem or they are lying because simply its a very rare situation where you can't fix a bug in a software

Of course you would say "Yeah sure a free software fanatic like you wouldn't miss an opportunity to jump on Microsoft's throat, but smart guy what does this have to do with windows being proprietary??"

I'll tell you, let's suppose that the first scenario was right and Microsoft's team found it's not possible to fix this bug, if the software was free the community would have provided a fix for this bug. if a team of hundred developers at Microsoft couldn't do it I'm pretty sure that among hundreds of thousands of developers in the world there is someone who can actually come up with a solution

2- They're lying to you, which if true you won't be able to tell because no one has access to the code to say if its true or false that it can't be fixed. But why would the lie you ask. This is a product which is not bringing any money any more plus they need to force you to buy their new product windows "whatever the hell they name it". So why fix an old software while he can take the opportunity to force you to buy more proprietary software

3- Its too expensive for them to do it. The programmers at redmond will spend too much time fixing this bug and time equals money and microsoft's strategy is not going into the direction of spending money on software they are not selling any more. Which brings us again to free software. If the code was free the community also would have provided a solution without calculating the hours or minutes spent on this bug fix

So whatever the reason is Microsoft tells you again to please throw away your software and buy more software from us. Enjoy our blood sucking process and please report any troubles getting the blood out of your veins to our technical support department.

You gotta love Free/Libre software, Long live the GNU :)

Comments

YoussefAssad's picture

Good topical link

--

systems's picture

Hmmm

Well when I first read this, my first impression was wow, they still issued bug fixes for those 6-8 year old OSes, wow, they are better than I expected Seriously I didn't expect they would. I read the article and the quoted word was "feasible" , and feasible don't mean impossible, so they didn't lie You need to work for or with an egyptian software firm, you will see a lot more serious lies, seriously, I am sure MS tells less lies than the average egyptian company, meaning MS is something we should aspire to have the "likes of it" in Egypt. I also don't think OSS is better in supporting old release than MS. I look at Postgresql for example, and they seem to only support the ,most recent releases (v 7 and above), and I dont think other OSS does a better job! And I also think many people underestimate how much effort it would take to be a competant programmer, competant enough to fix security is years old code, this task to me seems monumental. This is why I can't expect OSS to be better, the only OSS advantage seems to be that upgrading is less costly


-- W. B. Yeats, He Wishes for the Cloths of Heav

BooDy's picture

Amen to that :)

Don't get me started on egyptian firms :)

Yes you're probably right since the release is too old but the fact that this software is proprietary led to the late discovery of the security bug, if the software was free from the beginning it would have had a higher probability for critical bugs like these to be discovered earlier

Death is only the beginning...

phaeronix's picture

I think if you compare the

I think if you compare the number of linux kernel releases, and the span of support applied to these different version, to the number of windows versions released, you will know that the FOSS model wins hands down.

Same goes to other software.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.


Dr. Radut | blog